Claimant v Darlington Borough Council
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of his employment. There was insufficient evidence to establish the claimant had the impairments of ASD, anxiety, or IBD, or that any such impairments had substantial adverse effects on his day-to-day activities. Without the protected characteristic being established, the claim could not proceed.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of his employment. There was no diagnosis of ASD, specific learning difficulties or dyspraxia supported by medical evidence. Ms Skinner's report indicated 'weaknesses associated with' dyspraxia but did not amount to a diagnosis. Without disability status, the reasonable adjustments claim was struck out.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a Maintenance Surveyor by Darlington Borough Council from August 2023 to January 2024, a six-month probationary period. He was dismissed for failing to meet required standards. He brought disability discrimination claims relying on alleged impairments of Autism Spectrum Disorder, anxiety, low self-esteem, and irritable bowel syndrome. A preliminary hearing was listed to determine whether he was a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010.
Decision
The tribunal concluded that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. There was no medical diagnosis of ASD, only a 2015 report suggesting specific learning difficulties and 'weaknesses associated with dyspraxia', which fell short of a diagnosis. The claimant's stress episodes were normal reactions to adverse circumstances, not a mental impairment of anxiety. There was no evidence that any bowel issues amounted to IBD or had substantial adverse effects. The claims were struck out.
Practical note
Self-diagnosis and reports indicating 'weaknesses associated with' a condition are insufficient to establish disability status; medical diagnosis and evidence of substantial adverse effects on normal day-to-day activities are required.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2500672/2024
- Decision date
- 8 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Maintenance Surveyor
- Service
- 6 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No